On 18 May 2012, at 14:50, Jim Giner wrote:

> Daft is a little harsh.  :)  00:40 is just not a time value that is 
> generally accepted.

It may appear harsh, but as far as I'm concerned it is daft to make assumptions 
like that. You've essentially disallowed 12:nn am, but allowed 1:nn am, 2:nn 
am, 3:nn am, etc, because you're not validating the data in a non-ambiguous 
way. I have no idea what you're developing, but you're making a big assumption 
about the data that you're getting, which may appear reasonable to you, but to 
me it's daft. Nothing personal, just my opinion, which is all I have to offer.


Stuart Dallas
3ft9 Ltd

Reply via email to